The National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) is fighting the push by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (And Really Big Fires) (BATFE) to make it more difficult for Americans to own firearms covered by the National Firearms Act (NFA). The NRA-ILA’s issued the following call-to-action . . .
As we previously reported, the Obama administration, via the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, has proposed a new rule governing applications by legal entities such as trusts and corporations to make and transfer National Firearms Act (NFA) firearms. To justify the proposed rule, the administration and BATFE have stated that over 39,000 applications for transfers of NFA firearms to trusts or corporations were received in 2012 alone. Nevertheless, the agency cited not a single case in which an NFA firearm transferred to a legal entity was used in the commission of a crime.
The proposed rule would significantly complicate transfers of NFA firearms to legal entities. An especially burdensome provision, for example, would create new classes of “responsible persons” for each type of legal entity and require that each of these persons submit fingerprints and a photograph with a transfer or making application, as well as undergo a background check. BATFE seems to ignore or misunderstand that many NFA firearm owners choose to use trusts to hold their NFA firearms and other property for estate planning reasons, one of which is to simplify the transfer of the firearms to the heirs of the owner. Thus, children, including those who are very young, are often beneficiaries of trusts. The proposed rule seemingly would require even such children to be included in its expanded background check procedures.
Further complicating the transfer process, the proposed rule would require each “responsible person” of a legal entity to get a certificate or “sign-off” from a chief law enforcement officer (CLEO) before a transfer could be approved. Not only will this further tie up limited government resources by potentially requiring multiple sign-offs and background checks to be done for each transfer, it will allow CLEOs who refuse to process NFA transfers for even the most law-abiding of citizens effectively to veto the transfer. In these CLEOs’ jurisdictions, the proposed rule would act as a de facto ban on the otherwise perfectly lawful transfer of NFA firearms.
BATFE is now seeking comments on the proposed rule and has made multiple commenting options available. NRA encourages you to make thoughtful and respectful comments to BATFE on the proposed rule. To comment, there are several options available:
Through the federal eRulemaking Portal;
By fax to: (202) 648-9741; or
By mail to: Brenda Raffath Friend, Mailstop 6N-602, Office of Regulatory Affairs, Enforcement Programs and Services, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice, 99 New York Avenue NE., Washington, DC 20226; ATTN: ATF 41P.
All comments must include the agency name, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, and the proposed rule’s docket number, ATF 41P. The federal rulemaking website has tips on writing an effective comment that covers what agencies look for in the rulemaking process.
Written comments must be postmarked and electronic comments submitted on or before December 9, 2013. The electronic submission site will close at 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on December 9th. Please note that all materials submitted for comment, including personally identifying information, will be made available to the public on the federal rulemaking website. Note, too, that comments will continue to be accepted during the government shutdown.
BATFE has already received over 1,200 comments regarding the proposed rule. We hope that the number and quality of comments in opposition to the proposed rule will encourage BATFE to abandon this poorly conceived rule, that will have zero impact on public safety, in favor of effective measures that truly target the criminal perpetrators who commit crimes.
Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the “lobbying” arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Visit: www.nra.org
meh. California resident. Nothing for me to get excited about.
For all the work that those in free states have done for people behind enemy lines, I think we owe them some help on this one.
Oh, really? Because all I see on this site is “CA is a lost cause” and “CA deserves what they get”, etc., etc. along those lines.
Or 8+ million California gun owners can uproot themselves and their families and become refugees in our own country, why, so we can change the balance in the house and ensure the rights of the people that tell us that California is a lost cause.
Thanks for a whole lot of nothing.
^^^ THIS ^^^
<– California here… Thanks for everything *eye roll*
If that’s all you’re read here you haven’t seen my posts. I’ve advocated groups of us concerned out-of-staters come out to help the cause. It’s a far piece for me (from NC) and would take extensive planning but I’d be willing to help a peaceful protest or just help man a table for an NRA membership drive. I once suggested a protest at various locations on your state line would be effective at drawing attention to the plight of the Californian people. (Imagine a bunch of gun carrying protestors with signs demanding “Freedom for California’s Citizens!”) But most of all we need to get more people to see that guns are ok, fun, beneficial & lifesaving. We do that on an individual basis.
I have personally donated to Calguns on more than one occasion. I live in Texas.
I’ll comment even as a CA resident. Sure, I can’t have the good stuff, but I support other gun owners and gun rights. Besides, I won’t be in CA forever.
Now hold on there guys I said Cali was a lost cause once but now its not it’s merely the front lines of the fight think of the coasts as the trenches during WWI and middle America as no man’s land if we don’t at least fight to keep antis in their coastal state trenches then we in the middle are boned. Even better if we can defeat them in their trenches of New York D.C. and California right now we have them contained for the most part in their power bases (read large cities) we keep em busy enough there that they can’t expand to rural areas and gain a meaningful foot hold ( Colorado) right now we need to worry about holding the line then we can start to take rights back slowly much in the same way they were taken in the first place.
Thanks for the update. Comments Submitted.
I’m still waiting to hear how a suppressor falls under an act supposedly designed to regulate firearms.
“BATFE seems to ignore or misunderstand that many NFA firearm owners choose to use trusts to hold their NFA firearms and other property for estate planning reasons, one of which is to simplify the transfer of the firearms to the heirs of the owner.”
No, they understand perfectly well, and want everyone to have to relinquish their NFA items instead of passing them on to heirs.
Just another way for O to raise a tax.
200 bux was alot of money in 1934??
Guess they just want an excuse to bring some more inflation into the picture.
Since none of these items are or have ever been used in crimes.
What good is a 20 thousand dollar Thompson with out a 1000 or what the hell 5000$ tax stamp??
That’s next folks.
Maybe its time for me to use my trust for something besides making my relatives a few dollars when Im gone.
How about a Cleo requirement for a “shall sign” within 10 business days if no adverse information found with a process for release/review/hearing on said adverse info cases. Similar to most states chl
The NFA branch runs a background check. Those Cleo “shall sign” laws are a farce. Tennessee requires the Cleo sign off and mine would not sign my paperwork. I sued and lost. Again, no support from the bill sponsers or any “gun rights groups”. I formed a trust and was able to obtain my NFA weapons.
I have a ffl now and pay the sot, but that should not matter.
No one should have to pay $200 tax and no one should have to register these NFA weapons.
this is you guys https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=439331966176526&id=389688014474255&set=a.389792557797134.1073741829.389688014474255&refid=7&_ft_=qid.5935129523782674407%3Amf_story_key.-84803265021502553
That’s it. Your entire comment is that all gun owners are racist and are upset cause barry’s in office? Truly? If you’re typical of our opposition we don’t have a problem.
No, the problem is he is a Bolshevik tutored by Frank Davis when he was growing up. He study communism at Occidental and Columbia. Read his books and listen to the Books on Tape versions, both so you can see the entire book (in print) and here it in Barry’s voice. He talks about going to communist seminars at Columbia to “clear his head.” I don’t like Lenin, Stalin or Krushev either and they really are Caucasian.
Same pointless memes, self righteous attitude, and low amount of likes that can be found on every other politically based, anti gun FB page…
Outstanding job towing the line, carry on.
“The Hypocrisy of the Hypocrisy and Stupidity of Gun Control Advocates Page”
Do they speak English where you live?
Hey, I have to give him credit on the second part, I agree that gun control advocates are stupid…
I think the title is meant to be clever and ironic with a hint of sarcasm throw in, but it just comes off as asinine.
You hit the nail on the head… the only reason to dislike government expansion, high deficits, higher debt, and decreased disposable income are because the president is a black guy. It surely couldn’t be that I believe that less is more when it comes to government (to a point, obviously; I’m no anarchist), that the government must “learn to live within its means” (the same as any other large organization), and that more money in my pocket to be distributed as I choose is a good thing.
Let me ask you this… under what circumstances would criticism of Obama or his policies be justified?
BATFE should be a convenience store. As a Constitutional matter, all NFA laws are illegal and should be disregarded as a matter of course.
I agree that the laws are unconstitutional. Unfortunately, disregarding them currently comes with a door prize of 10 years and/or $25,000 (or is it $250,000) to the government. This is a price that not many are willing to pay for the required civil disobedience to start overturning these laws through those means. The alternative is to keep hammering those we send to DC to “represent” us until they actually do.
^^^This^^^ Prison and heavy fines and felony convictions to make a point in a battle that we’re mostly winning(Ignoring CA and NY and a couple others) doesn’t make a lot of sense.
The dark spot on the FOPA of 1986 was the fact that it banned all automatic weapons made post 1986. This data was essentially them same as well. FOPA should protect people when transporting firearms through hell holes like NJ, but they still arrest and convict people for obeying the laws such as the Brian Aitkin case where the punk thug Judge Morley refused to let the jury know about FOPA. However, I bet if it was dealing with a post 1986 NFA weapon, the judge would have instructed them about it. That is correct Judge Morely, I called you a punk and you should be disbarred.
NRA-ILA also needs to question why it takes 6 to 10 months for paper work to go through even when a Sheriff has done the back ground checks and signed off on it. The tax stamp money should be going into the “general treasury” either and then they wouldn’t be understaffed so that “dog wouldn’t hunt.”
Not to mention if you have already been vetted by NICS and whatever other form of back ground verification your local and state AHJ requires for CCW.
When I was living in South Jersey, I remember a story about a Phila cop that used his SMG in a crime. That was in the late 80s. I was unable to find anything with a Google search and my collection of magazine clippings was lost in a fire. Does anyone remember this story?
“On September 15th, 1988, a 13-year veteran of the Dayton, Ohio police department, Patrolman Roger Waller, then 32, used his fully automatic MAC-11 .380 caliber submachine gun to kill a police informant, 52-year-old Lawrence Hileman. Patrolman Waller pleaded guilty in 1990, and he and an accomplice were sentenced to 18 years in prison.”
Thanks, Ralph. OH, PA: I wasn’t really close. They both have 2 letters, though. 8~)
So there is more evidence against LEO having NFA items than Joe Q. Public. Plus they end up in the hands of criminals just like when the ATF botched a sting operation in Wisconsin and had some automatic weapons stolen.
what is the “(And Really Big Fires)” thing a reference too? Waco maybe?
And if you are writing a letter to the ATF about this, don’t forget they are also still taking comments for the other EO for not allowing importation of surplus firearms as well. (just remind them that even Diane Feinstein made a special exemption for them in her last AWB bill).
We will have a crime on record now that the cat is out of the bag if the girlyman in the big white house has to do it herself
I recently dealt with this also in my comments to ATF’s 41P proposal. I have posted my comments for others to use as a guide.
Goldman’s comments do a great job of pointing out everything that’s wrong with 41P. They’re also epic in scale (which tells you something about the multitude and magnitude of the issues that are wrong), so if you plan on reading through them, bring a sandwich. Fascinating reading, though.
Thanks for your compliments on our Comment for David. Although it may seem epic, it truly is not as we focused on those issues specific to David. There are a number of other issues, including the business and monetary effects on FFLs and the suppliers of raw materials, that need to be addressed. A full-blown Comment, addressing all the issues, with proper expert opinions (audiologist, economist, FFL manufacturers….etc) would probably be a 150 page+ Comment, with exhibits probably exceeding 150-200 pages. We are prepared to handle that Comment if some in the Industry want to come forward. Unfortunately, we don’t have the resources to hire all the experts that are necessary and spend the hundreds of hours preparing a full blown Comment without a client.